"CREDITABLE JOURNALISM"
[TO THE 'EDITOR OF " SPECTATOE!'] Sm,—Though I have been a diligent reader of 'the "Spectator; fortliiitylears, I have never-felt impelled before- novr th become' one of its-correspondents. But'your Christmas number supplies. each cogent and amusing illustrations of partisanship, veiled: by a severely philosophical manner, that I cannot refrain fromi asking you'to allow me to enter my respectful protest.
(I) iron commend Mr. Stanton for his manly speech in tire Mouse, -and with this we anti-conscriptionists will heartily; agree. Plitt when you describe him as " a man fighting, alone: againtittlie-powerful organizations cif the Labour and the Radical' 'Parties ltheitalies are mine), and winning " on thecompulsory service lieket," you entirely misunderstand the meaning and
cif theMerthyr eleetion. &true-that Mr.- Stantonis opponent -received the support of 'Mr. Arthur Henderson and
'Mr. Brace. But though they are members of the. Coalition 'Government, they are -not Radicals any more than they areTortes. 'I-dont:41mo* of -a single Radical who opposed' tit Stanton, though I know- ,many, including 'the Radical candidate, Mr. Ail:emus James, who supported him. 'Why db you say that the 'Radical organization 'fought against Mr.' Btaritonst T challenge you to produce any -evidence to prove' your allegation. You might with equal -truth 'assert that the Tory organization -Opposed him, 'but this you -were careful not, to do. Why'? As a matter Of -feet, it is petfeetiy well :known' that Mr.:Stariton'S victory was due-to a combination of Tories: and 'Radicals to defeat "Heir ilardieism " 'in the Merthyr' ,Boroughs. 'Nor is 'it right to Claim 'Mr. Stanton's victory ns triumph for compulsion. 'Mr. Stanton in his speeth expressly stated' that, -though -he -himself was -prepared to vote for con- i ncription if -necessary, 'the great -majority cif his supporters( --were in 'favour of the vohmtary system. The Merthyr result. is evidence -of the invincible spirit of the country to-fight this war' to thehitter end. It is too bad to distort-this-fine-feeling oTpratricitisni to serve rontroversialpurposes.
0) Equally removed from "the 'facts is " Left-Centre's letter, in which ire quotes a provincial paper's criticism of the deputation:that waited on Mr. Asquith as' a- creditto provincial. ;journalism:" It suggests that the deputation was' intended to persuade 'the Prime `Minister to play fast and loose " with Ids pledge to Ihe.married men. I absolve the provincial organ Of any intentional desire to distort' the truth or to east aspersions onthe sense cif -honour of responsible politicians. I only accuse It of accepting too readily tire jaundiced insinuations of 'the less reputable organs of the London Press. Sat what can one any of a journal of the standing and eepittatiort Of 'the Spectator --reprilMisliing its ill-informed comments, and apparefilly, by its laudatory "footnote, placing its imprimatur on them t The W'pectaforatfelat has no excuse,'for on -December 22nd 'Mr. X. N. 'Thomas, llf.P:, and I, two 'of the deputation's speakers, made our ,position perfeetly clear in the 'House of Commons. 'I did not, indeed, disguise my opinion that the distinction between married and unmarried men, which does not obtain in any conscriptionist country, ought never to have been made ; but both Mr. Thomas and I made it plain that in our opinion the pledge, once given by the Prime Minister, must be kept in letter and in spirit. I wonder if the Spectator would be so careless of the views and reputations of M.P.'s who agreed with it about compulsion.—I am, Sir, &c., [We shall not argue with Mr. Llewelyn Williams. It is too obvious that he would, whatever we wrote, adopt the attitude of the Brahmin in Southey's poem:-
" I am a blessed Glendoveer,
'Tis mine to speak and yours to hear."
—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
